UPDATE: ESSENDON players facing doping accusations will not join a court battle against ASADA’s investigation into the club’s 2012 supplements program, and their identities will remain confidential.

The players’ barrister, David Grace QC, told the Federal Court today the 34 former and current players issued with show cause notices by ASADA did not wish to join proceedings and agreed to be bound by the court’s ruling in the trial.

Justice Middleton accepted the players’ assurances to accept his decision and ruled they didn’t need to join the three-day trial that starts on August 11.

He asked Mr Grace to provide a list of the names of the 34 players to the court, but said their identities would remain confidential.

Essendon and its coach James Hird claim the ASADA investigation with the AFL was illegal and overstepped the powers of the anti-doping authority.

Lawyers representing the players had resisted all attempts to join them to the legal stoush for fear they would be publicly outed in the court.

Hird’s legal term further fleshed out his defence, claiming that ASADA piggy-backed on the AFL’s powers over the players to force them to submit to interviews with the anti-doping investigators and seize text messages and emails.

Nick Harrington, for Hird, said the investigation also denied his client the right not to incriminate himself. Mr Harrington said the joint investigation was “a poisoned fruit” and could not form the basis for issuing infraction notices.

It comes as a controversial video that could see the AFL’s top medico Dr Peter Harcourt subpoenaed to give evidence in the Federal Court fight has been pulled down from YouTube.

It’s not known how or why the footage recorded at an anti-doping conference in Zurich last November is no longer available.

The original video became unavailable shortly after the Herald Sun put to the AFL that some of its contents may have been in breach of the league’s own anti-doping code.

The AFL has not publicly commented on Harcourt’s disclosures regarding the Essendon supplements scandal or his claims that the AFL “retired three players” because of their illicit drug addiction.

Harcourt made a series of sensational revelations in Zurich, including the claim that “35-odd” former and current Bombers players were being monitored for “potential hormonal issues or cancer”.

He also stated that “the real reason” the AFL teamed up with ASADA to investigate Essendon was to give the anti-doping body “enormous power” it did not have to access information and coerce witnesses.

Essendon and Hird, whose lawyers could issue the Harcourt subpoena, believe his admissions in Switzerland back their claim that ASADA exceeded its powers when investigating the club’s 2102 supplements program.

Harcourt is believed to have told the AFL he did not realise he was being filmed at the anti-doping conference.

Pictures of three Essendon players were shown to the audience during Harcourt’s presentation — disclosures which appear to be breaches of the AFL Anti-Doping Code.

The code states: “The AFL or ASADA, or any officials of either, will not publicly comment on the specific facts of a pending case (as opposed to general description of process and science) except in response to public comments attributed to the player, other person or representative

“The identity of any player or other person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation may only be publicly disclosed by the AFL or ASADA in accordance with this code.”

Harcourt said in Zurich: “There was probable use of performance enhancing drugs, but without documentation and knowing precisely what was done, we can’t be certain. But there was clear risk of use.

“At the moment we have doping violations that are pending — ASADA is currently analysing those things.”

The AFL Players’ Association condemned Harcourt’s assertion that there was a “broad acceptance” by Essendon players of the club’s supplements program.

“We disagree with Dr Harcourt’s suggestion that players passively accepted the use of supplements and did not ‘jack up and say what the hell is going on’,” acting AFLPA chief Ian Prendergast.

Little said he was appalled by Harcourt’s reference to cancer.

“If there is a serious health risk that he knows about that he hasn’t passed on to us, that is worse than irresponsible,” Little said.

“I’ve now done 10 presentations to parents ... and none of those have dealt directly with the cancer possibility ... and I feel, and I have made this very clear to the AFL, that my credibility with the parents is being drawn into question. Have I been avoiding it? Have I chosen not to mention it?”

Harcourt is believed to have had AFL approval to speak in Zurich.

“(McLachlan) is mindful of the fact that a number of these things occurred under a different sort of regime,” Little told the Herald Sun.

“That could be right, but at the end of the day the AFL are not in any doubt about how we feel.

“We’ve either got a doctor who is running his own agenda, or we’ve got an organisation which gave the approval when they shouldn’t have.”

Essendon is also seeking answers over Harcourt’s revelations that the AFL sent specimens from Essendon players to Germany during 2012 — months before the club “self-reported” to the league and ASADA.

“The Essendon Football Club would like to have answers as to why they were sent — was it the AFL or ASADA acting together? Or was it one party acting?” Little said.

Asked if Harcourt had breached the non-disparagement agreement reached between the AFL and Essendon last August, Little said: “If it doesn’t breach it, it bends it pretty significantly.”